If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ.You must register to post. After registering, your first post will be reviewed before it appears. We've found this is necessary to limit spam. Registration is free and quick. To view forum posts, select the topic that you want to visit from the list on the forum home page. (Click the "forum" tab on any page to go to the home page.) Under each topic, you can add a comment to an existing discussion, or click "Post New Thread" to start a new discussion.

Bonus team members

Since the competition for the podium spots is getting a bit heated (although #1 seems to have a lock on it), it has been pointed out to me that a certain team in the top four has 12 members. I usually don't pay a whole of attention to this, but a fellow team mate happened to catch it. Are we all able to get a 12th member?? If so, I'd be more than happy to add someone who's only ridden 36 days!

Just to scramble things up a bit, I think the final standings should be based on the scores of the last 8 players on each team. That would reward the teams with great teamwork more than the ones with a couple of heroes.

Just to scramble things up a bit, I think the final standings should be based on the scores of the last 8 players on each team. That would reward the teams with great teamwork more than the ones with a couple of heroes.

Just to scramble things up a bit, I think the final standings should be based on the scores of the last 8 players on each team. That would reward the teams with great teamwork more than the ones with a couple of heroes.

Offense intended. But if that were the case, I think the teams should be loaded toward that. As it currently stands, the teams are based upon all members and their past mileage. A team with a few people who do lots of miles are typically paired with people who do less. If you were to use your logic, that team would be at a disadvantage before you even started (unless you are just referring to a pointless prize, then all is ok). But then, why stop at the bottom 8? Why not just pick the bottom 5?? The whole point of the competition is to be an overall team.

Team 7 is currently 2 points behind the 12 member team - I think Rule 5 is in effect here.

Personally, I don't really care. I was only pointing out what a team mate had mentioned. I do realize that the prize money for #2 vs. #3 is quite similar, and that the difference won't change my retirement planning.

And if Rule 5 were in effect, I think other random teams should have 13 and 14 members just to make it more interesting.

Offense intended. But if that were the case, I think the teams should be loaded toward that. As it currently stands, the teams are based upon all members and their past mileage. A team with a few people who do lots of miles are typically paired with people who do less. If you were to use your logic, that team would be at a disadvantage before you even started (unless you are just referring to a pointless prize, then all is ok). But then, why stop at the bottom 8? Why not just pick the bottom 5?? The whole point of the competition is to be an overall team.

Actually, we don't really have any idea how the teams are derived. It's a closely hidden secret. This year it is only performing a tad better than random selection.